There is nothing extraordinary about the government showing interest when even a private citizen is contacting and meeting to interview someone who is wanted by said government on national security grounds.
Google's increased lobbying was dues to their big antirust battle a short while back, these tend to be expensive. Besides this is American and lobbying is a way of life here.
I'm not sure what Cohen was doing in Azerbaijan but is it really strange that he was getting support in a potentially hostile territory.
As for what ostensibly triggered this post, the "revelations" that firms get reimbursed for their troubles enabling surveillance, it's not new, nor is it a money making endeavor, it's basically the only concession by the government made in these wiretap laws, if they are to inconvenience entities with their surveillance they will at least have to pay for it http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/us/nsa-said-to-have-paid-e...
Also some targeted surveillance might be necessary the problem is with the dragnet sort, and these revelations don't make a distinction between the two which doesn't automatically mean that it's the worst case scenario.
Assange might not have been pleased with his interview with Schmidt but suggesting that Google started the Arab spring is absurd.
There is nothing extraordinary about the government showing interest when even a private citizen is contacting and meeting to interview someone who is wanted by said government on national security grounds.
Google's increased lobbying was dues to their big antirust battle a short while back, these tend to be expensive. Besides this is American and lobbying is a way of life here.
I'm not sure what Cohen was doing in Azerbaijan but is it really strange that he was getting support in a potentially hostile territory.
As for what ostensibly triggered this post, the "revelations" that firms get reimbursed for their troubles enabling surveillance, it's not new, nor is it a money making endeavor, it's basically the only concession by the government made in these wiretap laws, if they are to inconvenience entities with their surveillance they will at least have to pay for it http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/us/nsa-said-to-have-paid-e... Also some targeted surveillance might be necessary the problem is with the dragnet sort, and these revelations don't make a distinction between the two which doesn't automatically mean that it's the worst case scenario.
Assange might not have been pleased with his interview with Schmidt but suggesting that Google started the Arab spring is absurd.